Stop Pit Bull Ban in Ontario

[Mistruzzi]

The Dog Legislation Council of Canada is fighting this ban hard. If you want to go to www.doglegislationcouncilcanada.org to give ideas or get ideas. We definately need to publicly protest or organize something to show Michael Bryant Ontarians aren't happy with this.

[frustrating]

I will fight all the way to NEVER SEE A SINGLE ANIMAL hurt or seperated from it's owner unless it has a history of violence. That said, now I have to say this.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...12/?hub=Canada

And post these, wherever you live. Print them out and post them on cars, poles, community bulletin boards, in shopping malls, wherever flyers can be posted make sure they are seen.

BULLS**T - HUGE STEAMING CROCKS OF BULLS**T

Don't post them, don't spread this bull**** unless someone would like to come on here and show ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that the Attourney General suggested, said he would even consider tabling one bit of legislation that would effect ANY EXISTING DOG which has no history of aggression. I will eat my words in public if you can show him saying that. I listened to him talk for an hour about this on talk radio and he never suggested ANYTHING BUT a BREEDING and importing ban... which is very reasonable.

BSL will kill thousands of innocent dogs, "murder'

WHAT A PILE OF ****

Spread by BREEDERS and mentally unsound advocates [like windh] or people who have been told this will happen who never bothered to check the truth.

Do you think ontario wants to spend Billions of dollars in court LOSING the battle to put down innocent animals ?

Just do a GOOGLE SEARCH people, before the lies spread further


My opinion on the ban, for the record....

I have met wonderful pitbulls, a breeding ban or importating ban is still quite reasonable, the Attourney General's facts as presented on CFRB Toronto are that

1% or less of dogs are pitbulls
50% of fatalaties are from pitbulls or pitbull crosses.

So it doesn't matter whose retreiver or lab scarred who.

Don't say that its because of irresponsible breeding or owners, it doesn't matter because.

1. Which pitbulls are bred and not bred can not be legislated in anything but a fantasy world, and not enforced.
2. Which animal someone is allowed to own or not can not be legislated unless the licensing approach is taken, licenseing is a municipal function and can not be provincially legislated unless the dogs are declared a weapon.








This DON'T KILL PITBULLS CAMPAIGN IS BULL****


and I would eat my words if I were wrong.

thiswilleventuallysendspamtofrustrating@f__kedup.c a (works if you replace the __ with the uc)

[LavenderRott]

Wow. You really bought into all of that media crap in a big way, didn't you. Too bad you haven't done any of your own research. You would find that the attorney generals numbers are completely wrong.

First off, neither the U.S. or Canada has a comprehensive method of collecting dog bite statistics. Any reported bites are reported voluntarily and dogs are often identified by the biter, who has no clue as to what a "pit bull" is.

There is no way to know, accurately, how many pit bulls there are. A pit bull is a generic dog, not a specific breed. There is an American Pit Bull Terrier that is registerable in the U.S. but I am not sure if it is registerable in Canada. When "pit bulls" are banned, the ban usually covers a couple of specific breeds and mixes thereof. Since irresponsible owners don't bother to vet their dogs, you can bet they don't bother to get city or province tags for them, so again, there is no way to know how many there are.

A couple of weeks ago, pit bulls made the front pages of Canadian papers 3 times. That same week a child was attacked by a Chesapeake Bay Retreiver and required many stitches to his/her face. This story was buried by the press as it involved a "family friendly" dog.

This summer a court in Denver found that the animal control officers and vets responsible for identifing "pit bulls" in the city and euthanizing them were unable do identify the dog consistantly and accurately. Last week, the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio found that dog bans are unconstitutional.

Italy tried to ban "viscious" dogs starting with "pit bulls". Their ban list now includes 92 breeds of dogs including collies, corgis and Boston terriers.

People who own pit bulls that bite own them because of that reputation. To think that banning the dogs will solve the bite problem is niave. These people will just move to a different breed of dog, breed bad tempered dogs and get more of the same.

Be careful. The next breed on the list may be yours. And if things keep going the way they are, that may happen sooner then you think.

Oh, and by the way, the numbers out of Kitchner that support the pit bull ban are wrong. Kitchner stopped tracking dog bites when the ban passed. Now the only question about the dog that bit is - Does it have rabies. The breed of the dog doing the biting isn't asked any longer.

[frustrating]

Too bad you haven't done any of your own research. You would find that the attorney generals numbers are completely wrong

Of course you just proved my point, you did zero research and trusted the reasearch of the anti-bsl people who are spoon feeding you ****. SO I DID THE RESEARCH FOR YOU (before I wrote anything) Read it or stop talking.

It doesn't of course change the essential fact of the LIES that the Attourney General is going to kill dogs, You total ignored that and instead continue to go on and on about how wonderful pits are ? (and once again, I have known wondeful pits)

You seem to be arguing
1. There are no statistics on dog bites ?
2. That pit bulls are NOT more likely to bite ?
3. Because dog bite reporting is voluntary there are no real statistics ? Since I/he gave a statistic on fatatlities and not bites (I see you didn't really read it) your argument suggest that people have failed to report dog related fatalities, probably happens every day in your world ?
4. And of course because reporting a dog bite is voluntary, I'm sure lots of people have serious dog bites just sew them up themseleves at home

And I never used the numbers out of kitchner, and aside from the stats the fatalities are all around you, both dogs and humans.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf (breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks) by the way, this particular document will tell you that rotweillers cause more fatalities. They are an exceptionally more populous breed.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dog3.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dog4.pdf
http://aepo-xdv-http://www.epo.cdc.g...23.asp#Table_1
http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbites.htm

And lastly of course, the "italian dog ban", I would love to see a document support the "National Dog ban on collies"

Wow do, you ever prove my point.. you buy ALL the **** you are fed.

Google search for italian dog ban
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...ian+dog+ban%22)
Google search for italy dog ban
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...aly+dog+ban%22
Google search for italy bans dogs
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...y+bans+dogs%22
Google search for italy "dog ban"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...+%22dog+ban%22

Which turns up the village(s) that have actually banned dogs... and nothing regading ANY NATIONAL BAN

Once again, you bought the bull**** you were fed.

If you want an example of dog bans gone wrong... check out GERMANY, they may end up with an EU wide ban on Staffordshires because of it (http://www.petplanet.co.uk/petplanet...?article_id=38)


Or for that matter, actually check stuff out before spewing it on ye old interweb. Which was my whole point.

Originally Posted by LavenderRott

Wow. You really bought into all of that media crap in a big way, didn't you. Too bad you haven't done any of your own research. You would find that the attorney generals numbers are completely wrong.

First off, neither the U.S. or Canada has a comprehensive method of collecting dog bite statistics. Any reported bites are reported voluntarily and dogs are often identified by the biter, who has no clue as to what a "pit bull" is.

There is no way to know, accurately, how many pit bulls there are. A pit bull is a generic dog, not a specific breed. There is an American Pit Bull Terrier that is registerable in the U.S. but I am not sure if it is registerable in Canada. When "pit bulls" are banned, the ban usually covers a couple of specific breeds and mixes thereof. Since irresponsible owners don't bother to vet their dogs, you can bet they don't bother to get city or province tags for them, so again, there is no way to know how many there are.

A couple of weeks ago, pit bulls made the front pages of Canadian papers 3 times. That same week a child was attacked by a Chesapeake Bay Retreiver and required many stitches to his/her face. This story was buried by the press as it involved a "family friendly" dog.

This summer a court in Denver found that the animal control officers and vets responsible for identifing "pit bulls" in the city and euthanizing them were unable do identify the dog consistantly and accurately. Last week, the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio found that dog bans are unconstitutional.

Italy tried to ban "viscious" dogs starting with "pit bulls". Their ban list now includes 92 breeds of dogs including collies, corgis and Boston terriers.

People who own pit bulls that bite own them because of that reputation. To think that banning the dogs will solve the bite problem is niave. These people will just move to a different breed of dog, breed bad tempered dogs and get more of the same.

Be careful. The next breed on the list may be yours. And if things keep going the way they are, that may happen sooner then you think.

Oh, and by the way, the numbers out of Kitchner that support the pit bull ban are wrong. Kitchner stopped tracking dog bites when the ban passed. Now the only question about the dog that bit is - Does it have rabies. The breed of the dog doing the biting isn't asked any longer.

[Writing4Fun]

Actually, frustrating, I just searched google for "italy dangerous breed" and came up with a plethora of supporting reports from newspapers from around the world.

Italy's law indicates that children, delinquents and criminals who have caused harm to people or animals are banned outright from owning any of the "dangerous" breeds on their list. Otherwise, you're allowed to own one of these breeds, as long as you keep it muzzled and leashed in public, and take out private, third party insurance to cover it.

[pitbulliest]

Originally Posted by Pit Advocate

Does anyone know of any groups or organization that intends to fight this ban? I am outraged by the ignorance of many people, including this Ontario politician who is clearly using the pitbull issue as a way to gain popularity. I am also annoyed at the many ignorant people who are supporting his cause. Since this pitbull issue has resurfaced a couple of days ago, I have gotten many strange looks from people in my neighborhood, as well as a few remarks of how my dog "kills people." My dog would neevr hurt a fly! He is great with people, especially kids..and is the biggest baby! In fact, from my daily walks with him, I notice that it is usually the smaller dogs, like Jack Russel Terriers or Chihuahuas that are more hyper and problematic. Please...if anyone knows of any advocacy groups that would fight this, please let me know!

Sorry..I guess I'm a bit late on this post..but yes there are quite a few groups that are fighting this ban..including ourselves of course! I actually just joined the yahoo group that is fighting BSL all around the province whenever it pops up...here's a link if you'd like to read some of the bulletin board topics that are popping up over there:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DLCCOntario/

I also know that there are actually many forums that are taking an interest in this ban and handing out flyers or putting up posters..writing letter to Bryant...signing petitions..etc..every single person really counts and can make a difference. I visit this forum often, and the topic of the ban has been ongoing there as well:
http://www.pitbullforum.com

I'm sure that there are more organizations that are trying to fight the BSL...you can probably call the Toronto Humane Society and see what they have to say about it, and whether or not they know if there are any other organizations which are trying to influence Bryant to change his mind.

Don't worry you guys..I know we can win this as long as we stick together Numbers count! And we all know its the irresponsible owners and breeders that need to be punished, not the dogs. Education for the general public about our dogs, and stronger fines/penalties for the morons that can't take care of their animals properly is what needs to happen here!

My message to FRUSTRATING:
You need to calm down. Your aggressive responses will only cause people to ignore every ignorant word you're spewing out. Why are you so darn angry? Relax and make your point calmly....

First of all, I'd like everyone to know that statistics regarding dog bites and identification are purely innacurate, and if anyone is to believe these statistics, right off the bat, you are being naive. Dogs which are identified as pit bulls are most of the time a completely unrelated breed. Moreso, dog bites are recorded based on the severity of the bite. Let's face it, when you're bitten by a Chihuahua, its likely to be less severe then when receiving a bite from a Doberman or a Pit Bull Terrier. Not to mention, small dog bites are rarely reported, and this further damages any potential accuracy in statistics (which doesn't exist anyways!).

Here's a link to a website that talks about these kinds of statistics:
http://s96980453.onlinehome.us/statistics.htm
Better yet, here's a great book that goes into detail on the entire subject from top to bottom...I suggest this to anyone that's a statistics freak :P
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/purchase.html

[Loki]

I'm not as informed as either party in this, but I'd like to point out a couple things.

The editorial Note in mm461 (MMWR - posted by frustraring) says that to determine breed specific mortality rates, A COMPLETE ascertainment of deaths and an ACCURATE determination of the Breed( I haven't read everything posted yet, but I have seen no proof of either regarding this document) and RELIABLE breed populations ( which the document itsellf ADMITS is unavaiable) are necessary. The Document states that it's accuracy is limited by this fact.
Personally, this document proves that available statistics are flawed.

I will continue to read these documents, but so far, reading them is making me MORE positive that BSL can't work.

About Italy, I believe that the ban was tabled, but scrapped after the fiasco that BSL proved to be in Germany. Italy decided that BSL was useless.

Try a Google search for 'Breed Specific Legislation in Italy',
You will definitely find the topic.

[Loki]

Posted by Frustrating:
"
4. And of course because reporting a dog bite is voluntary, I'm sure lots of people have serious dog bites just sew them up themseleves at home
"


FROM Same document( Editorial Note): In 1994, an estimated 4.7 Million persons( 1.8% of US population) sustained a dog bite; of these approximately 800,000( .3%) sought medical care for the bite.

Frustrating, you are just proving that Lavender really knows what she is talking about.

[LL1]

Nice filthy mouth "frustrating" or should I say Sue H of Emo's Oasis???

Any reason why you are singling out a woman who has devoted years of her life to saving Pitbulls? Wait a minute - didn't she "out" you as a breeder/dog fighter? Is that why you aren't on petfinder anymore? Ever get your grandkids back? How about your dogs seized many times by the SPCA? How are you doing Sue???

If you learned how to spell, and knowing you as well I do, learned how to bathe and care for your animals and kids and grand kids, you would be so much better off!!

Originally Posted by frustrating

Spread by BREEDERS and mentally unsound advocates [like windh] or people who have been told this will happen who never bothered to check the truth.

[Spurby]

Originally Posted by LL1

Nice filthy mouth "frustrating" or should I say Sue H of Emo's Oasis???

Any reason why you are singling out a woman who has devoted years of her life to saving Pitbulls? Wait a minute - didn't she "out" you as a breeder/dog fighter? Is that why you aren't on petfinder anymore? Ever get your grandkids back? How about your dogs seized many times by the SPCA? How are you doing Sue???

If you learned how to spell, and knowing you as well I do, learned how to bathe and care for your animals and kids and grand kids, you would be so much better off!!

Warning- she steals garden gomes as well!!LOL what a loser

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by Loki

I'm not as informed as either party in this, but I'd like to point out a couple things.

The editorial Note in mm461 (MMWR - posted by frustraring) says that to determine breed specific mortality rates, A COMPLETE ascertainment of deaths and an ACCURATE determination of the Breed( I haven't read everything posted yet, but I have seen no proof of either regarding this document) and RELIABLE breed populations ( which the document itsellf ADMITS is unavaiable) are necessary. The Document states that it's accuracy is limited by this fact.
Personally, this document proves that available statistics are flawed.

I will continue to read these documents, but so far, reading them is making me MORE positive that BSL can't work.

About Italy, I believe that the ban was tabled, but scrapped after the fiasco that BSL proved to be in Germany. Italy decided that BSL was useless.

Try a Google search for 'Breed Specific Legislation in Italy',
You will definitely find the topic.

Again, there is a lot of reason for EXTENSIVE debate before BSL... I was only bothered by the misinformation campaign.
"The Attourney General is going to murder thousands of dogs ?"

"Italy Has banned 92 breeds"

I could be convinced a breeding ban is useless... but I couldn't stand to see this campaign of bs.

At least you read something before you spoke.

Thanks

[frustrating]

Nice filthy mouth "frustrating" or should I say Sue H of Emo's Oasis???

"Who the Heck is Sue H ?" I can't be bothered to spell after midnight, I apologize in advance.

Why is it that everyone has a problem with what I said never focuses on the actual issue ? I am a guy with 2 dogs and 3 cats who raises money for andf provides service for non speciesist rescue and cat rescues.

I apologize for my filth, but this thread continues ON and ON and ON without anyone saying, "Hey that poster they want us to spread is lying to incite people", or "Italy didn't ban 92 breeds of dog"

and who did I single out ? I singled out no-one, only LIES I like to single out lies... there are enough in the world.

Any reason why you are singling out a woman who has devoted years of her life to saving Pitbulls? Wait a minute - didn't she "out" you as a breeder/dog fighter? Is that why you aren't on petfinder anymore? Ever get your grandkids back? How about your dogs seized many times by the SPCA? How are you doing Sue???

If you learned how to spell, and knowing you as well I do, learned how to bathe and care for your animals and kids and grand kids, you would be so much better off!!

[Spurby]

I know exactly who you are now frustrating..and yes, you DID single someone out [Windh] and yeah, you can't spell because the web-site you had up previously about this issue showed that several times. Talk about spreading lies and half truths, you would know all about that wouldn't you??? go crawl back under the rock you came from.

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by Writing4Fun

Actually, frustrating, I just searched google for "italy dangerous breed" and came up with a plethora of supporting reports from newspapers from around the world.

Italy's law indicates that children, delinquents and criminals who have caused harm to people or animals are banned outright from owning any of the "dangerous" breeds on their list. Otherwise, you're allowed to own one of these breeds, as long as you keep it muzzled and leashed in public, and take out private, third party insurance to cover it.

My problem with lavendar rott was with 2 statements.

1. Italy tried to ban "viscious" dogs starting with "pit bulls". Their ban list now includes 92 breeds of dogs including collies, corgis and Boston terriers.

Trying to indicate that this ban was either in effect or even in danger of being in effect (if you translate the search results from an italian search engine) or read beyond the first ten google results... you'll find that the ban was a political manouver with little possibility for success.

http://www.abcitaly.it/

(use this to translate http://world.altavista.com/tr)

2. No one keeps statistics on Fatal dog attacks ? (in response to the stats I posted)

Which they do, and it shows in the U.S. (according to the CDC) that numerically rottwielers kill more people, it also shows that only pits and rotts are significant in causing deaths.

Thank you for the more usefule search of "italy dangerous breed"... lots more info there.

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by Spurby

I know exactly who you are now frustrating..and yes, you DID single someone out [Windh] and yeah, you can't spell because the web-site you had up previously about this issue showed that several times. Talk about spreading lies and half truths, you would know all about that wouldn't you??? go crawl back under the rock you came from.

Cool...

I didn't single this person out in any way that meant anything to anyone but people IRL who know the real name. I feel sad for that person... she actually believes herself. I hope she someday gets better.

But I said who I am, see I'm not hiding who I am.. .I said I'm not Sue whoever.

If you know who I am, My email address is public and organizational knowledge and I'll stand by anything I say.

You see, I'm always open to new information.

And I don't lie.

Oh and in case anyone else thinks I'm someone out there, I basically have no internet identy or existance, and don't usually participate in forums and never in chats... so if you've mistaken me for someone who said something somwehere sometime. You're wrong.

[Spurby]

Originally Posted by frustrating

Cool...

I didn't single this person out in any way that meant anything to anyone but people IRL who know the real name. I feel sad for that person... she actually believes herself. I hope she someday gets better.

But I said who I am, see I'm not hiding who I am.. .I said I'm not Sue whoever.

If you know who I am, My email address is public and organizational knowledge and I'll stand by anything I say.

You see, I'm always open to new information.

And I don't lie.

Oh and in case anyone else thinks I'm someone out there, I basically have no internet identy or existance, and don't usually participate in forums and never in chats... so if you've mistaken me for someone who said something somwehere sometime. You're wrong.

Ah, but Frustrated in bed, you are someone out there, i feel for all those you must deal with you on a daily basis Get a life, K? Let the people who actually know what they are doing regarding dogs and BSL do their job, and do try to be a more responsible knowledgeable dog owner first before spewing you garbage around, looks really dumb on your part. Try reading AND understanding what was written, that will go a long way!!

(*sorry for any bad spelling or grammer, it's late for me too!)

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by Spurby

Ah, but Frustrated in bed, you are someone out there, i feel for all those you must deal with you on a daily basis Get a life, K? Let the people who actually know what they are doing regarding dogs and BSL do their job, and do try to be a more responsible knowledgeable dog owner first before spewing you garbage around, looks really dumb on your part. Try reading AND understanding what was written, that will go a long way!!

(*sorry for any bad spelling or grammer, it's late for me too!)

"who actually know what they are doing regarding dogs and BSL do their job,"

Some people here actually speak articulately, but others like you ignore the issue and make wasteful personal attacks.


You've never said to me "Frustrating, you're an idiot... but the poster did lie", instead "i feel sorry for the blah blah blah, or you're Sue H. of whatever the heck"

Gee you're smart.

Ignoring the topic suggest you're still living that lie. No one is going to kill innocent dogs... it's too stupid even for thsi governement and legally nearly impossible.

So instead of telling me whats wrong with me and ignoring the issue, which is all anyone but LOKI has done... talk about the disinformation problem.

[LL1]

Is her man still in jail Spurby? Wow - that's been a long time.

Originally Posted by Spurby

Ah, but Frustrated in bed,

[LL1]

Learn how to spell it properly, and the only experience you could possibly have with the Attorney General would be seeing his staff in a courtroom.

Originally Posted by frustrating

The Attourney General

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by LL1

Is her man still in jail Spurby? Wow - that's been a long time.

Wow, learn to read.. I said who I am.

Learn how to spell it properly, and the only experience you could possibly have with the Attorney General would be seeing his staff in a courtroom.

So the intellectual debate continues ? I see you're not afraid to debate the issues at all ? It's so perceptive of you to recognize all the criminal actions I have eluded to here in this forum and all the criminal behavior I have exhibited. You are so pereceptive you should work for the FBI or CSIS or something.

I have to go spend time in the courtroom now defending myself... I've been arrested again... you know... third time this week and all.

Oh wait, the police are here again ? They say that LL1 pointed me out to them as a dastardly criminal and thats good enough for them. Wouldn't want people going around asking LL1 to engage someone on the actual issue.. no sireee.

If ignorance is bliss, you must be ecstatic.

Enjoy your Anonymity.

[LL1]

Funny - I don't see your name or email address anywhere. And email addresses are real easy to create anonymously BTW.

Originally Posted by frustrating

Cool...


But I said who I am, see I'm not hiding who I am.. .I said I'm not Sue whoever.

If you know who I am, My email address is public and organizational knowledge and I'll stand by anything I say.

[LavenderRott]

Sorry, hun, I do my own research and certainly don't post unless I can back up my facts.

Going back and reading the posts, you discussed the Attorney General - Mr. Bryant and his facts. He is getting his numbers from Kitchner and other cities with bans in place. He has surrounded himself with ban proponants and not experts in the fields of animal behavior.

Fatal dog attack statistics. You want them, you will have them. These are the American statistics because, well, quite frankly, my source on this set of statistics is the best source out there. It is well researched, easy to read, and right at my fingertips. And it is not anti-bsl propaganda, just the facts.

The study was done on dog fatalities from 1965 to 2001. I will give you the breed and the number of fatalities attributed to that breed.

Airedale - 1
Akita - 6
American Staffordshire Terrier - 2
Australian Shepherd - 1
Basenji - 1
Boxer - 4
Briard - 1
Brittany Spaniel - 1
Bulldog - 2
Chesapeake Bay Retriever - 1
Chow - 13
Coonhound - 2
Dachshund -3
Doberman - 13
German Shepherd - 40
Golden Retriever - 4
Great Dane - 15
Hunting dog - 1
Husky type - 17
Irish Setter - 1
Labrador Retriever - 4
Malalmute - 17
Mastiff (bull) - 5
Newfoundland - 1
Old English Sheepdog - 1
Pit bull type dog - 90
Pomeranian mix - 1
Presa Canario mix - 1
Rodesian Ridgeback - 1
Rottweiler - 54
Samoyed - 1
Siberian Husky - 21
St. Bernard - 15
West Highland - 1
Wolf dog - 23
Mixed breed - 71

Yes, there are 54 deaths attributed to rottweilers. In those same years, there were 1,109,173 rottweilers registered with AKC. Now, my good calculater is at work, but it seems to me that 54 out of over a million are pretty small odds. German shepherds, 40 out of 2,741,822. Again, pretty small odds. AKC doesn't have the numbers for the pit bulls since it is a pretty generic term covering 3 or 4 different breeds (depending on who you talk to) and mixes there of.

How does the Center for Disease Control collect it's dog bite data? Well, I will explain it as it is posted on it's website. The number are collected from participating emergency rooms across the U.S. These numbers include age of victim, type of damage. Periodically, someone does a random phone survey of the reports that it has in their computer. They talk to the victim, or the parent/guardian of the victim (in the case of a minor) to determine the breed of dog that did the biting. Do I know for a fact that not all dog bites are reported? Yes. I was bitten a couple of years ago by a dog in my home who had his foot stuck in my car door. Did I report the bite? No. Why would I, the dog was obviously in serious pain.

Kitchner has reported that since the pit bull ban there have only been two bites by pit bulls in that city. What they don't tell you is that the total number of dog bites has not decreased.

As for Italy. You are right. I misspoke. There are 92 breeds of dogs on it's restricted list, not banned.

Just out of curiosity, where did Mr. Bryant get his numbers on the percentage of dogs that are pit bulls? Since "pit bull" often includes American Staffordshire Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers, Bull Terriers and American Bull Dogs, I find it hard to believe that he knows what percentage of dogs in Canada belong to these breeds. If memory serves, only one of the breeds is registerable by the Canadian Kennel Club (maybe two). Since the general public can often not discern the difference between a purebred dog and a mix, thereof, I doubt that these numbers are accurate.

1% or less of dogs are pitbulls

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by LavenderRott

Sorry, hun, I do my own research and certainly don't post unless I can back up my facts.

Going back and reading the posts, you discussed the Attorney General - Mr. Bryant and his facts. He is getting his numbers from Kitchner and other cities with bans in place. He has surrounded himself with ban proponants and not experts in the fields of animal behavior.

Fatal dog attack statistics. You want them, you will have them. These are the American statistics because, well, quite frankly, my source on this set of statistics is the best source out there. It is well researched, easy to read, and right at my fingertips. And it is not anti-bsl propaganda, just the facts.

The study was done on dog fatalities from 1965 to 2001. I will give you the breed and the number of fatalities attributed to that breed.

Airedale - 1
Akita - 6
American Staffordshire Terrier - 2
Australian Shepherd - 1
Basenji - 1
Boxer - 4
Briard - 1
Brittany Spaniel - 1
Bulldog - 2
Chesapeake Bay Retriever - 1
Chow - 13
Coonhound - 2
Dachshund -3
Doberman - 13
German Shepherd - 40
Golden Retriever - 4
Great Dane - 15
Hunting dog - 1
Husky type - 17
Irish Setter - 1
Labrador Retriever - 4
Malalmute - 17
Mastiff (bull) - 5
Newfoundland - 1
Old English Sheepdog - 1
Pit bull type dog - 90
Pomeranian mix - 1
Presa Canario mix - 1
Rodesian Ridgeback - 1
Rottweiler - 54
Samoyed - 1
Siberian Husky - 21
St. Bernard - 15
West Highland - 1
Wolf dog - 23
Mixed breed - 71

Yes, there are 54 deaths attributed to rottweilers. In those same years, there were 1,109,173 rottweilers registered with AKC. Now, my good calculater is at work, but it seems to me that 54 out of over a million are pretty small odds. German shepherds, 40 out of 2,741,822. Again, pretty small odds. AKC doesn't have the numbers for the pit bulls since it is a pretty generic term covering 3 or 4 different breeds (depending on who you talk to) and mixes there of.

How many pitbuls are there, are these stats on line ? That would be great.

You had made the point that there was no real data. And when I mentioned rotts I myself I beleive described them as incredibly more numerous than pits.

How does the Center for Disease Control collect it's dog bite data? Well, I will explain it as it is posted on it's website. The number are collected from participating emergency rooms across the U.S. These numbers include age of victim, type of damage. Periodically, someone does a random phone survey of the reports that it has in their computer. They talk to the victim, or the parent/guardian of the victim (in the case of a minor) to determine the breed of dog that did the biting. Do I know for a fact that not all dog bites are reported? Yes. I was bitten a couple of years ago by a dog in my home who had his foot stuck in my car door. Did I report the bite? No. Why would I, the dog was obviously in serious pain.

Of course, this bite you didn't report is also irrelevent to breed discussion.

You're missing what I said, please re-read my statement.. I said "are you trying to tell me that there are un-reported fatal dog attacks" (3. Because dog bite reporting is voluntary there are no real statistics ? Since I/he gave a statistic on fatatlities and not bites (I see you didn't quite read it) your argument suggest that people have failed to report dog related fatalities, probably happens every day in your world ?) thats what i was saying, since the attourney generals statistics were on fatalities. On top of that, I doubt there are many cases of "breed undetermined" or "it looked like a pitbull in a fatal dog attack, as law enforcement seems to do a better job and put more effort into finding an aggressive dog than they do murderes.

And in the case of fatal dog bites,
Kitchner has reported that since the pit bull ban there have only been two bites by pit bulls in that city. What they don't tell you is that the total number of dog bites has not decreased.

As for Italy. You are right. I misspoke. There are 92 breeds of dogs on it's restricted list, not banned.

Just out of curiosity, where did Mr. Bryant get his numbers on the percentage of dogs that are pit bulls? Since "pit bull" often includes American Staffordshire Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers, Bull Terriers and American Bull Dogs, I find it hard to believe that he knows what percentage of dogs in Canada belong to these breeds. If memory serves, only one of the breeds is registerable by the Canadian Kennel Club (maybe two). Since the general public can often not discern the difference between a purebred dog and a mix, thereof, I doubt that these numbers are accurate.

I have emailed him and asked him for their statisitcs and sources, in the guise of someone who might do an article... because they are overloaded in email and I wanted to see if I could stand out, a staff member has promised to forward the information this week.


Thanks for taking the time to talk instead of slander or make guesses at who I am (after I already said it I am sorry if my response to your original reply was discourteous, I can see now that you just wrote it on the quick.. and actually are putting thought into the discussion.

What do you think of the "picture poster" that originally incited me to post here ? (about Michael Bryant mudering dogs)

[frustrating]

Here are some more loose stats of interest. Canadian.

http://www.dogexpert.com/Miscellaneo...DutchStata.pdf

[Spurby]

Oh Please Chris, i know who you are!! a pathetic boy who has nothing better to do but be for BSL because someone you hate happens to be against it, can't you find anything useful and meaningfull in your life anymore?? Get over it!

I choose not to sit here and debate this with you for the very valid reason you have nothing useful to add, just googled links, and your own totally uninformed views. Basically, your not worth my time, you have other intentions, real nice, have you considered the dogs that would be suffering? Nah, hate is just to powerful isn't it? I am glad i do not live in the hate filled world you do, real sad exsistance it must be for you.

[jelena]

wanna help out pit bulls
every single person counts, please sign it
http://www.petitiononline.com/12512pit/petition.html
lets have these little guys deserve the love they need!

[sammiec]

Thank you, thank you for turning this into another meaningless thread that is probably soon to be locked. This thread was initially meant just for helping the breed, now it's just a childish insulting battle of "witts".

It has been mentioned many times that children do frequent this board, and the swearing and name calling are not needed. To tell you the truth I only skimmed over your posts. I found that trying to read the rambling statements and forever stats mixed with some name calling and swearing quite boring. That's obvioulsy not the way to get your point across, it certainly didn't work here...

The A.G. IS talking about a breed ban, the innocent pit bulls sitting in the shelters and are turned over because people don't want to deal with the stares, yelling, and discrimination that we are now faced with daily; these animals - which are innocent WILL die!! They will not find homes, they will never be loved, they will die alone! That's what we're talking about.
I think many realize that they will not come into our homes and take our pets, but they will enforce a muzzle by law and I bet you they will kill pit bulls that are turned into the shelter - pets that may have escaped their owners and are lost and freightened.

I don't think that my dog hould be forced to wear a muzzle when she leaves private property because of some irresponsible idiot, that doesn't care about their dog. That's not her fault, nor mine. That's the reality us pit bull owners face. That's what we're hoping to stop, and protect our pets.

But thanks again for ruining this thread, thanks for helping our cause.

[LavenderRott]

No, there are no unreported dog bite related fatalities that I know of. Mr. Bryant has and will use any "statistics" that he finds that he feels are relevent to support his cause. And quite honestly, the statistics are not worth much the way they stand. There is a big difference between a dog that bites for no reason and a dog that bites because, let's say, a child jammed a pen in the dogs ear. If statistics were more complete, then even my unreported bite would be relevent. As it should be, to be honest.

Because of the generic term "pit bull" I really don't think you will be able to find any accurate numbers as far as how many there are.

As far as law enforcement being able to find aggressive dogs, yes, they do. But identifing them is another story altogether. This was proven in court in Denver, Colorado earlier this summer. Animal Control officers and veterinarians responsible for identifying "pit bulls" and enforcing that city's ban were unable to do so with any degree of consistancy or accuracy.

As far as dogs dieing, yes it is going to happen. Already some shelters in Canada are not releasing pit bulls for adoption or to rescue groups that can take them out of the area. Since these dogs are taking up much needed space, they will be put down. As will any strays that are picked up after the ban goes into place. No, you say. Well, think about it for a minute. The laws that were put in place in Windsor last night says that all existing pit bull in the city must be registered, microchipped and insured by October 31. Responsible owners will have this done. Responsible owners are not the problem. It is irresponsible owners that are the problem, and those same people will not follow the new laws any better then the old ones. Worst case scenario, they will just turn their untrained, unsocialized, unvetted dogs loose for someone else to deal with and get a different large breed dog.

I am willing to bet that "pit bull" bites will dramatically decrease in Windsor, while rottweiler bites will increase. As a responsible rottweiler owner, this scares me. I have spent lots of time and money making sure that my dog is well socialized, vetted and trained. I don't have money for expensive liability insurance for a 10 year old dog that has proven she is not a bite risk. If something like this was put into place where I live, what would my options be? Get rid of my dog? Why should I have to?

And Spurby, I don't know who you are either, but if you have nothing to contribute to this discussion on BSL, would you please stop posting in this thread.

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by Spurby

Oh Please Chris, i know who you are!! a pathetic boy who has nothing better to do but be for BSL because someone you hate happens to be against it, can't you find anything useful and meaningfull in your life anymore?? Get over it!

I choose not to sit here and debate this with you for the very valid reason you have nothing useful to add, just googled links, and your own totally uninformed views. Basically, your not worth my time, you have other intentions, real nice, have you considered the dogs that would be suffering? Nah, hate is just to powerful isn't it? I am glad i do not live in the hate filled world you do, real sad exsistance it must be for you.

What dogs would be suffering, oops again a random baseless claim ?


Well enjoy your anominty,

Hide away, imagine the various people you seem to think I might be.

You still haven't addreseed the lies.

[frustrating]

Originally Posted by LavenderRott

No, there are no unreported dog bite related fatalities that I know of. Mr. Bryant has and will use any "statistics" that he finds that he feels are relevent to support his cause. And quite honestly, the statistics are not worth much the way they stand. There is a big difference between a dog that bites for no reason and a dog that bites because, let's say, a child jammed a pen in the dogs ear. If statistics were more complete, then even my unreported bite would be relevent. As it should be, to be honest.

Because of the generic term "pit bull" I really don't think you will be able to find any accurate numbers as far as how many there are.

As far as law enforcement being able to find aggressive dogs, yes, they do. But identifing them is another story altogether. This was proven in court in Denver, Colorado earlier this summer. Animal Control officers and veterinarians responsible for identifying "pit bulls" and enforcing that city's ban were unable to do so with any degree of consistancy or accuracy.

Totally, and breed ban or licensing etc... I don't see a viable solution to that problem. Kitchener uses a panel of "experts" but it's still pretty subjective.

As far as dogs dieing, yes it is going to happen. Already some shelters in Canada are not releasing pit bulls for adoption or to rescue groups that can take them out of the area. Since these dogs are taking up much needed space, they will be put down. As will any strays that are picked up after the ban goes into place. No, you say. Well, think about it for a minute. The laws that were put in place in Windsor last night says that all existing pit bull in the city must be registered, microchipped and insured by October 31. Responsible owners will have this done. Responsible owners are not the problem. It is irresponsible owners that are the problem, and those same people will not follow the new laws any better then the old ones. Worst case scenario, they will just turn their untrained, unsocialized, unvetted dogs loose for someone else to deal with and get a different large breed dog.

Shelters have to allocate space based on 1. temperment and 2. adoptability, I don't know what the adoptability of a pit bull is... we have regular contact with 2. local humane societies and they both contain good natured pits from time to time.

I am willing to bet that "pit bull" bites will dramatically decrease in Windsor, while rottweiler bites will increase. As a responsible rottweiler owner, this scares me. I have spent lots of time and money making sure that my dog is well socialized, vetted and trained. I don't have money for expensive liability insurance for a 10 year old dog that has proven she is not a bite risk. If something like this was put into place where I live, what would my options be? Get rid of my dog? Why should I have to?

And this i the crux, nobody should get rid of their dog if it has no negative history... I would hope that insurance companies are going to consider risk factors in rates... but it may be that they are unwilling to insure and will just make the rate unachievable. Grandfathering is the only approach if they want to pull something like this.



Bryant unfortunately has a political problem to solve aside from a public health one. What are the solutions that are feasible for him ?

1. A breeding importing ban.
2. Owner regulation / licensing

Do you think the windsor model has any value ?

Do you know of any others, and what would you like to see happen. I mean if he were to not just drop the whole thing.